Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Meghalaya · body

2025 DAILYLAW 609 (MEG)

GARO HILLS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL v. MOLJE M SANGMA

MC(WPC)/54/2025 · 2025-04-02

H S Thangkhiew

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 Serial No.02 Supp. List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG MC[WP(C)]. No. 54 of 2025 in WP(C). No. 149 of 2023 Date of Decision : 02.04.2025 Garo Hills Autonomous District Council, Tura, represented by the Chief Executive Member, GHADC, Tura, Meghalaya. …Applicant -Versus- Smti. Molje M. Sangma, W/o (L) Rimchan Marak, R/o Rongsakgre, P.S. Chiading, East Garo Hills District, Meghalaya. …Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S.Dey, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A.G.Momin, Adv. Ms. L.D.Sangma, Adv. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press: 2025:MLHC:279 2 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. This application has been preferred by the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council through its Chief Executive Member for extension of time in connection with the judgment and order dated 13-07-2023, passed in WP(C). No. 149 of 2023. 2. Mr. S.Dey, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the time allowed by this Court to affect demarcation of the plot of land of the respondent and of the other parties could not be completed due to the fact that certain issues had cropped up. In this context, the learned counsel has taken this Court to paragraph 18 of the application to show that the matter has been taken up actively, but due to the circumstances indicated therein, further time is required. 3. Mr. A.G.Momin, learned counsel for the respondent submits that it is a fact that the applicants have taken up the matter and they are also participating in the inquiry. 4. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and on examining the application along with the annexures, it is seen that the applicant is seized with the matter and what remains is only for the inquiry to be completed before the demarcation is affected. In this view of the matter, further 9(nine) months’ time is allowed to the applicants to 2025:MLHC:279 3 complete the process. It is however expected that the matter be taken up expeditiously. 5. Misc. case accordingly stands disposed of. Judge 2025:MLHC:279 Digitally signed by SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA RYNJAH Date: 2025.04.04 17:17:17 IST